I see you are now couching your statements with supposition.
Good idea.
He is neither a witness to obstruction or a participant. He is the acting AG. He has a responsibility to supervise the work of his subordinates.
And his subordinates did what they did. What is being obstructed? Nothing.
So an article by CNN saying Trump vented his anger about Whitaker but without direct Trump quotes.....right. :roll: Trump hasn't ever been reluctant to give statements to the press.I know that everything that's happening right now is making you numb and it's difficult to place anything into a larger context, but before you read this, remember that just a little over two years ago, Attorney General Loretta Lynch met with the husband of somebody under FBI investigation on an airport tarmac. Maybe they talked about their grandkids, maybe they didn't. Whatever happened, the impression their meeting created was enough to cause such a scandal that a mere two weeks later, Lynch recused herself from overseeing any aspect of the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails. Just to avoid the appearance of bias.
Now that you've got that locked into your mind, read about how the President is yelling at his Attorney General for not doing enough to obstruct justice. Whittaker has not been confirmed by the Senate and he has refused to recuse himself in spite of ethics advisors' counsel to do so.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/21/poli...-after-explosive-cohen-revelations/index.html
Expect Whittaker to testify on his role in OoJ, either in Congressional hearings, a jury or both.
So an article by CNN saying Trump vented his anger about Whitaker but without direct Trump quotes.....right. :roll: Trump hasn't ever been reluctant to give statements to the press.
Of course he will be summoned to testify before Congress.
It's amusing that he even uses the word IFI see you are now couching your statements with supposition.
Good idea.
At least. And then he will have to say under oath what trump told him. And of course since OoJ is one of Mueller’s investigations he’ll have something to say about that as well.
Or he could take a page from Comey and Hillary and just say "I forgot."At least. And then he will have to say under oath what trump told him. And of course since OoJ is one of Mueller’s investigations he’ll have something to say about that as well.
Sure. And then it will be pointed out, under oath, that nothing happened-- the investigation continued. And then it will be pointed out-- under oath--- that its the AG's job to supervise the work of the local DA's.
And doing so isnt obstruction, but rather the job.
How do you know that nothing happened?
Or he could take a page from Comey and Hillary and just say "I forgot."
Thank you for telling me what I think. Do you make a living reading palms too.? I just don't think that Trump colludedYou are one of the worst too. You keep claiming Trump is innocent, though I think deep down you know he's dirty as ****, you just don't care cuz you delight in it, because your feelings tell you Obama and Clinton were worse. The stuff you post suggests that you are a confirmation bias junkie.
The problem here is TRump cultists adjustable ethics. The mere appearance of malfeasance on the part of Democrats and they will screem to high heaven that it must be investigated endlessly until a crime is found. Then when they elect a criminal like King Tangface, I'm convinced, regardless of stated position, a large percentage of them cheer inwardly at every morsel of corruption the GOP gets away with. One it "get's the libs" which is far more important than solving problems, and two, in their way of "thinking" it's just fair play, they feel (facts are completely unnecessary) that "Democrats got away with worse", so it's "fair play", and I think they kinda delight in each revealed crime that goes un-punished.:roll:
They'd deny it endlessly, but it's pretty much how they operate.
Has the investigation stopped tic toc and all that?
I know that everything that's happening right now is making you numb and it's difficult to place anything into a larger context, but before you read this, remember that just a little over two years ago, Attorney General Loretta Lynch met with the husband of somebody under FBI investigation on an airport tarmac. Maybe they talked about their grandkids, maybe they didn't. Whatever happened, the impression their meeting created was enough to cause such a scandal that a mere two weeks later, Lynch recused herself from overseeing any aspect of the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails. Just to avoid the appearance of bias.
Now that you've got that locked into your mind, read about how the President is yelling at his Attorney General for not doing enough to obstruct justice. Whittaker has not been confirmed by the Senate and he has refused to recuse himself in spite of ethics advisors' counsel to do so.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/21/poli...-after-explosive-cohen-revelations/index.html
You predicted that it will be shown that "nothing happened." How do you know that "nothing happened"?
You predicted that it will be shown that "nothing happened." How do you know that "nothing happened"?
The investigation continues... It didnt stop.
Tell you what: let's make a friendly wager. I say that when Whittaker is inevitably brought to testify in front of Congress, it will be discovered that Whittaker was coerced or ordered by Trump to undermine the investigation in ways we don't yet know about. Interested?
The problem here will be definitions. The expectation seems to be that there can be zero controls and supervision on Mueller's work by anyone. It doesnt work that way. Mueller is not a free agent, nor a rogue agent. That natural and expected control and supervision has to be factored in. But it appears that such would be defined as proof of OOJ.
The difference is this: In one instance, the Lynch thing, we have a named reporter who took a freaking picture of the get together. In the other instance, we have a news article, based on spin, speculation, innuendo, hyperbole...and on unsupported rumors from unnamed sources.
Somehow, we've move from being a people who cherished facts to a rabid consumers of salacious rumor. Our most venerated news sources have devolved to tabloid journalism.
It's sad.
Oh sure. Of course. Everybody knows the best way to hold a nefarious clandestine meeting with someone is to do it in the middle of a major airport in broad daylight with a bunch of staff, security and media in tow. And don’t forget to make it a point to go around and personally greet the crew just to make sure that everybody knows you were there. You conservative ‘super sleuths’ are a riot.
Yeah Bill just happened to wait a fairly long time for Loretta's jet to show up. IIRC.Neither Bill nor Loretta had a bunch of media in tow. It was pure luck (bad for those two) that a local LV media guy was there and noticed the meet.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?